Deconstructing Darfur, Research Paper Example

Introduction

The province of Darfur lies in the western part of Sudan, Eastern Africa. Sudan is Africa’s largest country. The country is inhabited by citizens of Arabic origin in the north and blacks in the south including the Darfur region (Prunier, pp. 8-24). The province of Darfur borders Chad, Libya and the Central African Republic.  History shows that Darfur existed as a sultanate (Tunjur) in the 14^th century and developed to the level of autonomous Keira dynasty which was ended by the Egyptian conquerors and British colonialists in the 19^th century. In 1916, Darfur was absorbed into the neighboring Sudan to form one colony for the British during the 19^th century territorial expansions the struggle and partition of Africa. Although the Britons allowed Darfur semi autonomous status, the region remained underdeveloped during the colonial and into the post colonial time (Prunier, pp. 8-24). The Darfur inhabitants are mainly farmers and pastoralists. The non-Arabs being mainly farmers while Arabs are nomadic pastrolists.Darfur means the ‘land of fur’, so named after the non-Arab blacks who controlled the sultanate. The fur occupy less than a quarter of the Darfur population besides the over thirty other non-Arab ethnic groups. All these inhabitants of Darfur maintain their own native languages but speak a common language, Arabic. The Arabs in Darfur are mostly descendants of the Trans Saharan immigrants of the 14^th– 18^th century. As noted above, central Darfur is occupied by non-Arab blacks. Southern Darfur is occupied by the cattle-herding Baggara Arabs while the north is occupied by the camel-herding Abbala Arabs (Prunier, pp. 8-24). The pastoralist groups, especially the Abbala Arabs have been chronically excluded from land ownership leading to increased strain on natural resources. These have worsened by recurrent droughts and encroaching desertification. Drought from the mid-1970s to early 1980s led to massive migration from northern Darfur and Chad into the central farming belt (Prunier, pp. 8-24).

The Genesis and Evolution of the Darfur Crisis

Although several conflicts have been recorded in Darfur since Sudanese independence from British rule, the first war in Darfur occurred in 1987 when a Chadian Arab militia (janjaweed) armed by Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya in his attempt to control Chad, was driven into Darfur by Chadian and French forces(Johnson, p. 139). The militia was associated with the pastoralist nomadic Arabs and engaged in intense battle with the non-Arabic Darfurians.  However this insurgence was quelled by the government forces, but later the militia got government funding and armament.

In 1991, the Sudan Peoples Liberation Army (SPLA), an army formed by the south Sudan people to protest the government harassment of the non Arab south,  began an onslaught in Darfur but were defeated by the government forces and the Arab militia (Flint et al, P25). The Arabs of Darfur had remained loyal to the central government hoping to benefit but the government had perpetually ignored Darfur in its development agenda (Johnson, p. 139).There were a couple of pockets of rebellion in the 1990s fueled by feuds over natural resources among the Darfurians. The security agents were blamed for encouraging animosity among the Darfur residents through divide-and-rule tactics, watering down efforts by local leaders at peaceful coexistence. All in all, Darfur did not experience full-blown war in the in the 1990s. Chadian president agreed with the Sudanese president not to allow any sanctuary to rebels from the other country. There was lack of strong opposition from the SPLA since the 1991 insurgence and this lend to the decade long absence of war in Darfur in spite of the obvious tension which looked like it would erupt any day. In addition, many Darfurians remained loyal to the central Islamic government. A bloodier clash occurred in 1999 but the government once again intervened and quelled the clash (Flint et al p30).

The present Darfur conflict erupted in February 2003. They had issues with the way the central government was treating them in terms of power distribution. The SLA acquired arms from their relatives in the Chadian army (without the government’s approval). In March 2003, dissident Islamists ousted from the Khartoum government joined the SLA and strengthened it. The El-Bashir administration had a clear target towards getting a solution to the unfolding quagmire in the west of the country. The government responded through aerial and ground ambush by use of the horrendously armed janjaweed.  This terror gang raped women, burned houses and murdered, in an orgy of ethnic cleansing against the Darfur black, forcing the inhabitants into refugee camps within the country and into the neighbouring Chad (Faris p2).

In July 2004, the African Mission in Sudan (AMIS) was deployed and charged with the responsibility of monitoring and reporting the situation on the ground while providing security for the civilians (Amnesty International, p1). In September of the same year, the United Nations Security Council proposed the Commission of Inquiry into Darfur. In the capital of the neighbours Chad, peace negotiations were brokered that leading to a ceasefire. In 2005 the report of the United Nations Commission of Inquiry implicated the Khartoum government in atrocities against the Darfur civilians (Amnesty International, p1). In 2006 the Darfur peace agreement was signed while the UN sent a peace keeping mission to beef up the AMIS deployed by the African Union. Eventually a joint UN-Africa peace keeping mission was brokered called UN-Africa Mission in Darfur (UNAMID).  Since, the international criminal court has issued warrants of arrest against two senior government officials and the sitting president accusing them of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. The focus now is by the humanitarian organisations to have full enforcement of the UNAMID activities in Darfur.

Underlying Causes and Vested Interests in the Crisis

Various factors have been fronted as underlying the start and progression of the Darfur crisis. It has widely been argued that the war in Darfur is an economic and ethno-political hegemony that has taken several dimensions:

• Economic
• Political
• Ethnic

The economic roots of the conflict lie in the competition between pastoralists (generally Arab Africans) and agriculturalists (generally non-Arab Africans) over resources, such as land and water. As a report by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in 1976 exposed, Sudan’s economy is mainly agricultural. However, economic developments in the country have mainly been in the north, which employs a more modern agricultural sector while neglecting the southern and western (Darfur) regions of the country where the agricultural sector is more traditional but still in charge of over three quarters of the country’s agriculture(Jie p1). The same pattern is reflected in the distribution of the services such as education and health. It is this inequality in developmental projects and service distribution that has led to economic tensions in the Darfur region. This situation is worsened by the fact that the south and west produce 75% of the productive employment. Recommendations were given by the ILO on how to avert such discrepancies by having more resource allocation to the traditional sectors of the country (south and west). But these recommendations were not followed by the government ad further sideline of the Darfur in future planning.

Politically, fronts have been taken depending on the relations between the darfurians and the central government. The Arabs were at first allied to the central government when Khartoum attacked Southern Sudan. As a result the attack by the SPLA against the darfurians attracted huge government intervention. Militia have been funded by the government and directed against the blacks who are not in good terms with the Arab dominated Khartoum government. External influence has also been embroiled into the Darfur crisis. China has been the leading investor in Sudan’s oil industry and a trading partner. Even after withdrawal of other trading partners to pile pressure on the Khartoum government to put an end to human atrocities in Darfur in 2004, China remained in good terms with the El-Bashir administration. It has been reported that the money that Sudan gets from the oil business with China has been used to arm the government based militia and drive out the blacks from the oil rich regions of the south ( Cohen, p1). China has also been accused of using its veto power in the UN Security Council to give Sudan a diplomatic cover.

The Darfur war has been fought across an ethnic battle line. The janjaweed militia are from the Arab ethnic group who have been attacking the blacks and committing other human rights violations. The resource allocations have also been more to the Arab dominated areas of Sudan. The blacks have been economically marginalised since the inception of the central government.

The International Community’s Reaction to the Darfur Crisis

The international community has been blamed for sluggish response to the Darfur crisis. The response began by reports on the human rights violation by the various human rights and advocacy agencies and organisations such as Amnesty International and the International Crisis Group. In July 2004, the African Mission in Sudan (AMIS) was deployed and charged with the responsibility of monitoring and reporting the situation on the ground while providing security for the civilians (amnesty international p1). In September, the UN Security Council proposed the commission of inquiry into Darfur. Chad brokered negotiations that led to a ceasefire. In 2005 the report of the UN inquiry implicated the government in atrocities against the civilians (amnesty international).

The United States supported the deployment of more troops to the horn of Africa state. Other western countries supported and passed legislations towards troops deployment and facilitation of the Darfur Peace Agreement.

The international criminal court in The Hague has already opened charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. Two senior government officials and the president, Omar El-Bashir have been interdicted by the Louis Moreno Ocampos’ Netherlands based court (Walker, p1). This is a laudable move by the court given the fact that Sudan is not a signatory to the Rome statute that established the court.

Implications of the Darfur Crisis

The Darfur war has brought to the bare several aspects. It has exposed the obvious political and economical marginalization against the Darfur region of Sudan. The wanton onslaught against the non-Arab Sudanese in state operated machinery is exposed. To date, statistics form the crisis indicated that over 400 000 persons have died while over 2 million have been displaced. Severe hunger and starvation threaten to cause more loss of lives among the Darfur residents. The children are affected by severe malnutrition while humanitarian aid remains accessible to only a section of the affected civilians. This war has damning effect on the social framework of the inhabitants of Darfur whose life has been pushed back the social evolution theory, living in constant fear that they may be attacked by the militias any time. It has exposed the whole international society in terms of response to human crises. The crisis has exposed to the entire mankind how the Sudan government deals with its people and the selective application of justice in terms of government dealings with the crisis. The response by the human rights groups and the humanitarian aid organizations has been hampered from delivery of essential aid to the afflicted regions and the refugee camps by the very government agents and militia. And ironically, the locals don’t mind the presence of militia and other armed self defense groups as they trust them more than the government to provide security during threats. This leaves the question begging, where is the government when all this is happening? The crisis has been declared a genocide by many authorities among them the former US secretary of state Collin Powell. And yet the magnitude of intervention by the international community has not been with the utmost agility and promptness. While the United States government was understood to be pursuing a strong military peace keeping presence in the region, scholars have accused the same government of interference with the United Nations Security Council on Darfur crisis through real politic. The United Nations response was hampered by the Chinese decision to stand by the Khartoum administration using its veto power, a move that has been understood to be intended to foster continued business relations with the government of president el-bashir. The close neighbors of Sudan have been affected by the crisis. Chad has been affected the most. Claims have been made that the Chad government has been arming he janjaweed through the Arabs in its military. However, it is the scores of Darfur residents that have been forced into exile into refugee camps in the Chad republic that has had its toll on the Chad government. The neighboring African countries, including Kenya, are not allowed to send peace keeping missions in accordance with the African Union’s principle on border disputes. As these developments continue to unfold in Darfur, the economy, and socio-cultural development of Darfur has been brought to a halt. The sole purpose of survival in Darfur is now security. The right to life is in constant threat while the list of rights contained by the human rights charter continues to be a mirage and a distant dream to the people of Darfur. Social development cannot go on, there is total break up of the social fabric and the daily life in Darfur is a continuum of terror and fear with short spells of temporal peace. Basic necessities such as health and education have become a luxury as food is hard to come by. This is the situation in Darfur and it does not seem to improve in future if the interdictions by the international criminal court against the president will not lead to his arrest.

Conclusion

The Darfur crisis has had a big impact on the region.  The economic, social and ethnic axes have been looked at as the possible axes through which resolution of the Darfur crisis should be approached. It has been argued in popular media that the root cause of the crisis is underdevelopment and uneven distribution of resources and that correction of these holds the key to resolution of the crisis. The humanitarian aid needs to be beefed up to reach all the affected peoples. The international community need to come together and harness efforts to force the Khartoum administration into considering a speedy resolution of the underlying ills. The Darfur Peace Agreement needs to be upheld while the mission to Sudan (UNAMID) has to be beefed up and its mandate extended. As it stands, the current crisis could simmer on as a chronic unrest that would derail the development of the region for years. As the government prepares for the elections and the referendum on the feasibility of the southern Sudan secession, equal attention will need to be paid to the Darfur crisis.

Works Cited                    

Amnesty International. History of the Darfur conflict New York: Amnesty International, 2009

Cohen, R. Calling on China: The China-Darfur Connection. Washington: Washington Post. 2004

Faris, S. “The Real Roots of Darfur” The Atlantic Online 20 April, 2007: A2

Flint, Julie and Alex de Waal.  Darfur: A Short History of a Long War London: Zed Books, 2006

Jie, S. “Darfur Crisis Rooted in Economic Causes” Sudan Tribune 5 Sep, 2004: A1

Johnson, P. History of Darfur Web Retrieved 12 December 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Darfur#cite>

Prunier, G. History of Darfur Web Retrieved 12 December 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Darfur#cite>

United Nations. Report of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur New York:  United Nations. 2004

Walker, P. Darfur genocide charges for Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir. Web retrieved 12 December 2009 <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/14/sudan.warcrimes1?gusrc=rss&feed >

Wright, C. “Two Views of the Sudan”, The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple, 37.2(2004).